MARAPPA GOUNDER Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NAMAKKAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. Mr.P.Sanjay Gandhi, learned Additional Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3.

(2.) The petitioner, in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition would aver among other things that he is having a residential premises in R.Pudupatti Village and his father had put up a "Pandhal" [thatched roof] in the adjacent Natham lands nearer to his residential house about 60 years back and after the demise of this father, the petitioner had succeeded to the said estate and removed the thatched roof and put up asbestos roofing sheets for convenience and the said Natham land is admeasuring to an extent of 400 sq.ft. It is also the claim of the petitioner that he is in continuous possession and enjoyment of the said property by way of succession, admeasuring to an extent of 400 sq.ft., for very many years and the occupation of the same did not affect anybody. It is further averred by the petitioner that to his shock and surprise, the 3rd respondent, had issued the impugned notices under sections 7 and 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, and immediately, he met the 3rd respondent and explained in detail about his continuous possession and enjoyment of the said land and also submitted a representation dated 28.06.2017 for issuance of patta in respect of the said land.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in respect of the Natham land, the 3rd respondent is not vested with any jurisdiction to invoke the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, and therefore, the petitioner is constrained to make a challenge to the impugned notices issued under sections 7 and 6 of the said Act. The learned counsel, in support of his contentions, has placed reliance on the following decisions of this Court:-